Pirates are doing fine, financially

[UKFlounder]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5484947

Don't feel too sorry for the cellar-dwelling Pittsburgh Pirates. Losing has been profitable.

The Pirates made nearly $29.4 million in 2007 and 2008, according to team financial documents, years that were part of a streak of futility that has now reached 18 straight losing seasons. The team's ownership also paid its partners $20.4 million in 2008.

[Redlegs]

That's unfortunate for the fans of Pittsburgh. They used to be such a proud group. I remember how tough a three game series at Three Rivers used to be.

This is where the business aspect of the game comes in. MLB should do everything in their power to ensure the Pirates are making an effort to win. As long as the moneys are rolling in, nothing will be done. This is why the NFL has taken over as America's favorite game, IMO. Every fan needs to go into spring training with the hope of this being there team's year.

[15fan]

Originally Posted by Redlegs

This is where the business aspect of the game comes in. MLB should do everything in their power to ensure the Pirates are making an effort to win. As long as the moneys are rolling in, nothing will be done. This is why the NFL has taken over as America's favorite game, IMO. Every fan needs to go into spring training with the hope of this being there team's year.

Good for the Pirates owners. They bought the team, so they should run it as they see fit.

Bad for the Pirates fans. All 3 of them.

And good for Reds fans, too. As one of the teams in the only 6 team division in MLB, the fact that one franchise has 0 interest in competing increases the odds that the Reds can get to the post-season in any given season.

This is nothing new, and nothing unique to baseball. Regardless of the financial structures in place in a league, there are always going to be hapless franchises like the Clippers, Warriors, Pirates and Browns. Teams that even when they try, always manage to get it wrong.

[Rojo]

Originally Posted by 15fan

Good for the Pirates owners. They bought the team, so they should run it as they see fit.

Bad for the Pirates fans. All 3 of them.

And maybe not so good for Pittsburgh taxpayers.

[UKFlounder]

Or for MLB who gave them revenue sharing monies that obviously have not worked for their competitiveness. The Pirate owners can spend their money how they wish, but can they spend other teams' money how they wish? MLB has approved their plan, so I guess so. And maybe in a few years it will prove to have been a good plan, but I guess there is a bit more waiting to do

Originally Posted by Rojo

And maybe not so good for Pittsburgh taxpayers.

[UKFlounder]

But MLB says the Pirates are handling their finances within the rules, so MLB is basically approving of how they spend their money. Maybe they are actually spending it on development (the article said they spend about the same as others in that area, but if they are getting so much revenue sharing and spending so much on payroll, shouldn't their expenditures on development be HIGHER than most teams?), but it's tough to see that.

[Roy Tucker]

Reading the ESPN article reminded me of this SI article from a few weeks back...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...10/2/index.htm

The conversation with Bob Nutting towards the end doesn't quite jive with the published numbers.

I'm glad I'm not a Pirates fan.

[vaticanplum]

Originally Posted by Roy Tucker

I'm glad I'm not a Pirates fan.

I feel bad for Pirates fans a lot of the time but then I remember that most of them support the Steelers. That quashes my sympathies pretty quickly.

[RichRed]

Originally Posted by vaticanplum

I feel bad for Pirates fans a lot of the time but then I remember that most of them support the Steelers. That quashes my sympathies pretty quickly.

Very good point. I'll have to remember that.

[Roy Tucker]

Originally Posted by vaticanplum

I feel bad for Pirates fans a lot of the time but then I remember that most of them support the Steelers. That quashes my sympathies pretty quickly.

That is a very true statement. But even when the Pirates were good, the Pirate fan was a far different animal than a Steeler fan.

It's like I used to feel a little sorry for Cubs fans. After all, 1908 is a long time ago. But then when they experienced some success during the 2000's and your average Cub fan went from pathetic to obnoxious, any sympathies I had for them rapidly dissapated and I don't anticipate them *ever* coming back.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Roy Tucker

That is a very true statement. But even when the Pirates were good, the Pirate fan was a far different animal than a Steeler fan.
It's like I used to feel a little sorry for Cubs fans. After all, 1908 is a long time ago. But then when they experienced some success during the 2000's and your average Cub fan went from pathetic to obnoxious, any sympathies I had for them rapidly dissapated and I don't anticipate them *ever* coming back.

Such as they didn't show up even when the team was good. I still recall the significant amount of empty seats in the 1990 NLCS.

[RedsBaron]

Originally Posted by traderumor

Such as they didn't show up even when the team was good. I still recall the significant amount of empty seats in the 1990 NLCS.

IIRC correctly there were empty seats at Three Rivers way back in 1970 when the Reds and Pirates met in the NLCS.

[Blimpie]

Originally Posted by traderumor

Such as they didn't show up even when the team was good. I still recall the significant amount of empty seats in the 1990 NLCS.

I am testing my memory here, but I seem to remember that one of those NLCS games actually started during the afternoon on a weekday?

Zane Smith was the Pirates pitcher that day IIRC. I remember sneaking to the breakroom at work to watch portions of the game.

[oneupper]

I become a Pirates fan, a Cubs fan, a Brewers fan, etc...every time those teams play the Cardinals.

Can't begin to say how much I have appreciated the wins the Cubs and Brewers managed last week.

Thanks, guys!

[OesterPoster]

The Pirates did spend money on the draft this year, going 180% over slot to sign 6 of their top 10 picks.

The problem to me is that they only signed 6 picks out of the top 10. Betting on those 6 guys seems risky.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/draft/?p=2935